प्रायः तथा न स्यात्tag:typepad.com,2003:weblog-955812837086717552013-08-20T23:31:27-04:00US (Fucked-up) Foreign Policy and ITypePadThe Revenge of the Police Statetag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00e550089f9688330192aca650e1970d2013-08-20T23:31:27-04:002013-08-20T23:31:27-04:00The Revenge of the Police State Aug 17 2013 by Wael Eskandar [14 August 2013, security officer firing tear gas on protesters as they attempt to escape the attacks by the security apparatus. Image originally posted to Flicker by tarek1991] While the ongoing violence in Egypt has contributed to a...Bakulaji

[14 August 2013, security officer firing tear gas
on protesters as they attempt to escape the attacks by the security
apparatus. Image originally posted to Flicker by tarek1991]

While the ongoing violence in Egypt has contributed to a state of
confusion and polarization, one thing is certain: The biggest threat
facing Egypt remains the return of the police state. More specifically,
the threat concerns, not only the reconstitution of a police state,
which never really left since Hosni Mubarak’s ouster, but also the
return of the implicit, if not overt, acceptance of the repressive
practices of the coercive apparatus. In this respect, the current
face-off between the state and the Muslim Brotherhood holds very
damaging potential. Widespread anti- Muslim Brotherhood sentiment is
currently providing the state with legitimacy to use of force against
the Brotherhood, and, in the future, a potential cover for using similar
tactics against other dissidents as well.

There is a problem with the way security forces have violently
dispersed the pro-Mohamed Morsisit-ins, even with claims that both
Nahda and Rabea sit-ins were armed. Regardless of whether or not one
agrees with the Muslim Brotherhood or with the objectives of the
sit-ins, the murdering of over five hundred people goes against any
sense of human decency and morality. The armed protesters’ reported use
of unarmed individuals as human shields is equally despicable and
reprehensible. Beyond the serious moral considerations at hand, other
problems persist.

The forced dispersal of Rabaa and Nahda marks a triumph of security
solutions over political ones—a trend that characterized much of the
Mubarak era. Security solutions rarely solve a problem without the
support of a political course of action, which seems to be missing in
our current context. There is no question that the Muslim Brotherhood
leaders have a long history of poor negotiating behavior, showing
extreme stubbornness, and failing to uphold their end of the bargain on
many occasions, in power and in opposition. But this is exactly why
dealing with them demands a politically savvy approach, instead of
reliance on security solutions, which will only reinforce the
Brotherhood’s rigidity, not to mention the heavy human costs associated
with such measures.

Instead, the military and its sponsored government chose a
confrontational, security path. This path will only further empower the
coercive apparatus without guaranteeing any results, in terms of
political stability and social peace. As extremist groups are pushed
into hiding, the security leaders will find excuses to employ intrusive
surveillance measures, interrogate, torture, and abuse, all with zero
transparency and accountability. Supporters of the crackdown among those
who oppose the Brotherhood will gladly accept. Reinforcing this trend
is the fact that the crackdown has apparently empowered radicalized
elements among the supporters of the deposed president.

Some may say that the increasing influence of the security sector
will only be limited to “counter-terrorism” and extremist Islamist
groups that espouse violence. There are clear signs that this would not
be the case. For example, immediately prior to the crackdown against the
Muslim Brotherhood sit-ins, retired generals took control of
governerships in an overwhelming majority of provinces. For many, this
was a clear signal that the state has opted to “securitize” governance,
and political files.

Additionally, those who believe that security sector will not
overstep its boundaries clearly overlook the long history of the
Egyptian state’s meddling in political and private affairs in the name
of counter-terrorism and national security. Given that rich history, we
could safely conclude that today domestic intelligence agencies are
quickly gaining a blank check to meddle in our affairs for the sake of
national security. Soon Egyptians will be asked to support their
government in whatever decisions it takes on the grounds that the
government is at the frontlines of the fight against “violent
Islamists.” Political dissidents of all orientations will be vulnerable
to the accusation of being soft on “terrorism” or supportive of “radical
Islamists.” Will anyone care in the confusing state of insecurity?

Egypt, in other words, is on a dangerous path. There are many reasons
to believe that police forces will employ their brutal practices at
Mubarak era rates. The policing establishment itself has not changed in
any way, never reformed, and never held to account for its past crimes.
Minister of Interior Mohamed Ibrahim has even signaled that such a
return is imminent, pledging, “Security will be restored to this nation as if it was before January 25, and more."

Tacit supporters of the security state will respond that there was no
other way, that there was no room for negotiating with the Brotherhood,
and that the forcible dispersal of the sit-ins was necessary.

Such a response, however, overlooks the major limitations of the
security solution to the underlying problem, namely that calling on the
police—unreformed and lacking the proper training—to resolve the
standoff between the Brotherhood and the government is like asking a
butcher to do a heart surgeon’s job. Additionally, one could counter and
ask: Was it necessary for the police to target unarmed civilians
carrying cameras? Was it necessary for security forces to shoot at
unarmed crowds? Was it necessary for the police to leave unprotected all
the churches that suffered attacks in the aftermath of the sit-ins’
dispersal?

But setting aside analyses of what the police could have done
differently, it remains that the recent violence has only deepened
people’s reliance on the security state and will exempt politicians from
devising solutions to political differences. With the increase in
social conflict, particularly along sectarian lines, security services
will once again regain their traditional role as an arbiter of these
conflicts, as well as their license to employ abusive, repressive
tactics. This sustained sense of insecurity will only steer Egypt away
from real justice. With the empowerment of the security sector, there
will be no reason or motivation to push for revolutionary demands for
real reforms inside the policing establishment. It is also likely that
the escalation in violence and the pro-security rhetoric that the state
has been touting will make it difficult for political dissidents, who
are equally opposed to the Muslim Brotherhood and the military, to
employ street action.

In some ways, the MB’s confrontational approach, wittingly or not, is
handing back the coercive apparatus its license to kill and repress
with impunity, but so are all those who are cheering on the security
forces’ crackdown against the Brotherhood. Many such voices have
criticized Mohamed ElBaradie for resigning his post as vice president in
the wake of the recent violence. But in reality there is no role for a
politician in a state that is poised to pick a security solution in
dealing with every pressing challenge.

As we confront the question of whether or not Egypt will witness the
“return” of the police of the Mubarak era, a number of critical
questions arise, such as: Is there any revolutionary fervor left to
resist this route? Or have revolutionary commitments been drained
through all the blood and the failed attempts at establishing a
democratic political order?

Whether or not a new wave of revolutionary mobilization will emerge
to push back against the growing power of the security state is an open
question. But it is clear that the persistence of the confrontation
between the state and the Muslim Brotherhood will only deepen the
securitization of politics by reinforcing demands for security
solutions. What it will take to reverse the return of the police state,
which revolutionary activists have worked hard to resist, is uncertain.
One could argue that the brutal injustices that the police are bent on
committing will always make resistance structurally inevitable. But that
suggests that reviving resistance will come at a high price, one that
Khalid Said, Jika, Mohamed al-Guindy, and many others have paid.

Until
when does people like u will stop blaming the innocence an unarmed MB
for the killing of protesters including their sons and daughters. Even
after knowing nearly 100% killed are pro Morsi. Only your irrational
logic satisfies your conscience. There is more to it than meets the
eyes. It is so obvious, for the whole word to see. But unfortunately for
those "blinded" anti Islam & liberals, there have no human hearts
except the heart of a devil. Verily your joy will never last as death
approaches everyone. Be prepared for a bigger catastrophe, for people
like u, when the torments of Allah befall on all of u.

i
would like to clarify alot of points as an egyptian citizen, the
sit-ins of rabea and nahda were armed, and lot of weapons found.
needless to mention the threatens of their leaders online on the tv
show. unethical acts that were practiced in the 2 sit-ins with the
witness of the residents of rabea and nahda. we as egyptians in all the
cities see in the streets their demonstrations with armed people that's
why the police and army are attacking them, and it is our right to save
our country from terrorists even if they are egyptians. and it is the
egyptian people who asked the army and police to fight the terrorism,
and we will not leave a minority of people impose their regim on the
majority. they are most welcomed to participate in the political life
instead of making lots of crimes and attacks

I
would like to clarify alot of points as an egyptian citizen, the
sit-ins of rabea and nahda were armed, and lot of weapons found.
needless to mention the threatens of their leaders online on the tv
show. unethical acts that were practiced in the 2 sit-ins with the
witness of the residents of rabea and nahda. we as egyptians in all the
cities see in the streets their demonstrations with armed people that's
why the police and army are attacking them, and it is our right to save
our country from terrorists even if they are egyptians. and it is the
egyptian people who asked the army and police to fight the terrorism,
and we will not leave a minority of people impose their regim on the
majority. they are most welcomed to participate in the political life
instead of making lots of crimes and attacks.

it
is not logic by all means that the police kills their people as a dirty
game to accuse muslim brotherhood. we see that all the crimes and
attacks that happened in egypt are committed by MB and a logical
consequence to the dispersal of Rabaa and Nahda. specially that all the
leaders have threatened violence infront of all tv show.

it
is not true that the police and army are killing any body with morsy,
the evidence is all the mb demonstrations in all egyptian cities last
days. the only case that the police and army attack people, when there
are some armed people in the demonstrations shooting other civilians
which what we saw in our streets.

That the Brotherhood a terrorist group is trying to shake Egypt. But the people of Egypt Ghaly is and soldiers trying to rescue Egypt Egypt. From terrorism, they want to make Egypt such as Iran. But assure you we are the land of safety and security. Crisis and deport At the time, we will tell you security Enter Egypt in peace........ Egypt waiting for your support to become without terrorism. I hope you my friend that published between friends. Egypt to become the best without terrorism.